Thursday, January 15, 2009

Is the "Bailout" Working?


An interesting look
at the "Wall Street Bailout".

Who has benefited from all this? Every investor, every household and every business in the United States. You may not like the fact that, as a result of these actions, overpaid bankers were allowed to hang on to their jobs or preserve the value of their stock holdings. And you may be unhappy that the financial system remains in such fragile shape that it is still hard for some people and businesses to get loans they think they deserve. But let me assure you that things would have been a whole lot worse if these actions had not been taken.
...
There is plenty to dislike about the Treasury's bailout program, and no doubt there are lots of ways it can be improved, but it is simply unfair to call it a failure. Given the size of the credit bubble and the excessive leverage that banks were allowed to take on, there was no way to rescue the financial system without injecting new capital, shrinking loan portfolios and shielding bankers from the full consequences of their misjudgments. The standard by which it should be judged is not whether it is fair, which it is not, or whether it has magically prevented foreclosures and restored the normal flow of capital, which it could not, but whether it has sufficiently stabilized the financial system to allow for an orderly restructuring.

By that standard, it has been a qualified success.

Read More...

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Squanderville vs. Thriftsville


In I.O.U.S.A., Warren Buffet makes a cameo appearance to lend us a parable of the dangers of a severe trade imbalance. Squanderville vs. Thriftsville, taken from his 2003 Fortune magazine article, is a simplified look at the difference between spenders and savers. He then relates the story to our worsening situation...and his plan to turn things around.

A perpetuation of this transfer will lead to major trouble. To understand why, take a wildly fanciful trip with me to two isolated, side-by-side islands of equal size, Squanderville and Thriftville. Land is the only capital asset on these islands, and their communities are primitive, needing only food and producing only food. Working eight hours a day, in fact, each inhabitant can produce enough food to sustain himself or herself. And for a long time that's how things go along. On each island everybody works the prescribed eight hours a day, which means that each society is self-sufficient.

Eventually, though, the industrious citizens of Thriftville decide to do some serious saving and investing, and they start to work 16 hours a day. In this mode they continue to live off the food they produce in eight hours of work but begin exporting an equal amount to their one and only trading outlet, Squanderville.

The citizens of Squanderville are ecstatic about this turn of events, since they can now live their lives free from toil but eat as well as ever. Oh, yes, there's a quid pro quo -- but to the Squanders, it seems harmless: All that the Thrifts want in exchange for their food is Squanderbonds (which are denominated, naturally, in Squanderbucks).

Over time Thriftville accumulates an enormous amount of these bonds, which at their core represent claim checks on the future output of Squanderville. A few pundits in Squanderville smell trouble coming. They foresee that for the Squanders both to eat and to pay off -- or simply service -- the debt they're piling up will eventually require them to work more than eight hours a day. But the residents of Squanderville are in no mood to listen to such doomsaying.

Meanwhile, the citizens of Thriftville begin to get nervous. Just how good, they ask, are the IOUs of a shiftless island? So the Thrifts change strategy: Though they continue to hold some bonds, they sell most of them to Squanderville residents for Squanderbucks and use the proceeds to buy Squanderville land. And eventually the Thrifts own all of Squanderville.

At that point, the Squanders are forced to deal with an ugly equation: They must now not only return to working eight hours a day in order to eat -- they have nothing left to trade -- but must also work additional hours to service their debt and pay Thriftville rent on the land so imprudently sold. In effect, Squanderville has been colonized by purchase rather than conquest.

...

In effect, our country has been behaving like an extraordinarily rich family that possesses an immense farm. In order to consume 4 percent more than we produce -- that's the trade deficit -- we have, day by day, been both selling pieces of the farm and increasing the mortgage on what we still own.

To put the $2.5 trillion of net foreign ownership in perspective, contrast it with the $12 trillion value of publicly owned U.S. stocks or the equal amount of U.S. residential real estate or what I would estimate as a grand total of $50 trillion in national wealth. Those comparisons show that what's already been transferred abroad is meaningful -- in the area, for example, of 5 percent of our national wealth.

Read More...

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

U.S. Oil Import Map


Here's a great look at where our oil comes from - as well as where it came from in the past. The Rocky Mountain Institute created this slick graphical map derived from EIA data. Check it out:


Read More...

Monday, January 12, 2009

Key Concept - Comparative Advantage


While an absolute advantage in an endeavor refers to the ability to produce at the lowest cost or using the least amount of resources; a comparative advantage is the ability to produce at a lower opportunity cost.

An example: Suppose that two castaways on a desert island gather both fruit and grain, which they then share equally between them. Suppose that Castaway A can gather more fruit per hour than Castaway B, and therefore has an absolute advantage in this good. Nonetheless, it may well make sense for A to leave some fruit-gathering to B. This is because it is possible that B gathers fruit slightly slower than A, but gathers grain extremely slowly.

One needs to look at comparative advantage rather than absolute advantage, to discover how A and B can each best allocate their effort. If A's initial advantage over B in grain-gathering is greater than his or her advantage in fruit-gathering, then fruit-effort should be transferred from A to B, to the point where A's comparative advantages in the two goods are equal. Thus it may be rational for fruit to flow from B to A, despite A's absolute advantage.

Read More...

Sunday, January 11, 2009

Backstabbing for Beginners: My Crash Course in International Diplomacy


Backstabbing for Beginners: My Crash Course in International Diplomacy is the true story of Michael Soussan during his time as a UN Food for Oil Program Coordinator.

Witty and enthralling, you will not want to put this book down. The book, obviously written by an insider, is severely critical of the UN. It paints a bleak picture of the political infighting that can debilitate the UN. The power players save face by "passing the buck," essentially shirking responsibility on projects to avoid having to make difficult decisions.

As someone who knows little about the UN, I was very surprised at the level of corruption involved with the UN Food for Oil Program. I was appalled to find that France, Russia, and other nations were accepting millions in bribes from Sadam Houssein. Soussan paints a bleak picture of the United Nations but the overlying theme is that of hope, change, and achieving greater good no matter what the odds.

This truly is a must read. Soussan's style keeps you wanting more. You will want to stay up later (or lay out on the beach longer, in my case) to finish this enthralling piece.

Read More...

Saturday, January 10, 2009

The Upside of Down


The Upside of Down. Thomas Homer-Dixon. Recommended.

This selection was on the short list for my Christmas break reading, and while I moved through it rather quickly, I'm not really sure where to begin in its review. I have begun to shy away from the near bottomless pit of doomsday books - there is only so much time in the day, and I see no need to continue tuning into an echo chamber. I will continue to seek out solutions, however, and this volume seemed to have an upbeat message, which was very intriguing. Could there really be an "upside to down"?

There are three main themes in The Upside of Down. First, the author highlights the many problems that we face. He then draws parallels on how similar problems have destroyed civilizations in the past, namely the Roman empire. Finally, he explores the ways that we might be able to deal with our problems, or position ourselves to rebound from the crash - the "upside", as it were.

The problems we face have been covered quite a bit in recent months, so I'll just summarize them here. The author uses an earthquake analogy, with five "tectonic stresses" building to a large catastrophic release.

  • energy stress, especially from increasing scarcity of conventional oil;
  • economic stress from greater global economic instability and widening income gaps between rich and poor;
  • demographic stress from differentials in population growth rates between rich and poor societies and from expansion of megacities in poor societies;
  • environmental stress from worsening damage to land, water forests, and fisheries; and,
  • climate stress from changes in the composition of Earth's atmosphere.
I've covered several of these stresses quite a bit, especially in the Global Trends 2025 post series. He makes an interesting argument about the collapse of Rome, which I found to be the most memorable portion of the book.

In the second chapter, the author describes the energy requirements of ancient Rome in great detail. There have been countless looks at the fall of Rome, but as far as I know, the supposition that energy concerns caused its downfall is a rather novel idea. The basis of the argument rests in the fact that Rome depended on a solar economy. Nearly all of the energy they used was derived from humans and animals, thus food. Perhaps the most interesting factoid of the book was the calculation of exactly how much energy (in grain and hay) it took to build the Colosseum.

The grain and hay were fed to the humans and oxen who, in turn, built the elaborate structures and the most impressive society the world had yet seen. As the empire spread further from the center, more and more energy was spent in retrieving the energy on the outskirts. This is a common concept in peak oil circles - Energy Return On Energy Invested (EROEI). As the empire collected taxes from farther out, it took more resources to pacify/protect those people and then transport the remainder to Rome.

The city of Rome became dependent on these deliveries. The citizens and social structure were maintained by an elaborate system of food deliveries and taxation systems that kept everything running smoothly. According to the author, as time moved on, the good farmland was exhausted, all the rich neighbors were raided and exploited, the supply lines grew longer and the EROEI dropped to a level that could no longer support the society. The empire inevitably declined.

As for the "upside" of decline, I found the book less clear. After a several chapter diatribe on the evils of capitalism while giving no credible alternative, he gets to the payoff - catagenesis. Like a renewal of a forest after a fire, the author describes catagenesis as a rebirth, of sorts. So we must try to set ourselves up to be able to rebuild our society after the collapse - not exactly the uplifting message I was looking for.

Even still, the book seems to be lacking in concrete examples. The author puts limited faith in "managing solutions", which is no doubt what we will try to do. After it is clear that we must take some action, we will try to manage the problem while changing our way of life as little as possible. The danger of this approach, which I agree with, is that when we delay until the earthquake has happened, it is too late.

So what should we do? We must reduce the "tectonic stresses". As we review that list, however, we remember that they are some doozies. While managing solutions have their place, the author also suggests the "prospective mind". This is where he loses me a bit...I'm not 100% sure what he means, so I'll give you a summation paragraph:
The alternative approach I advocate requires us to adopt what I've termed a prospective mind. We need to be comfortable with constant change, radical surprise, and even breakdown, because these are now inevitable features of our world, and we must constantly anticipate a wide variety of futures. With a prospective mind we'll be better able to turn surprise and breakdown,when they happen, to our advantage. In other words, we'll be better able to achieve what I call catagenesis - the creative renewal of our technologies, institutions and societies in the aftermath of breakdown.
So basically we need to be flexible so we can quickly rebound when TSHTF. It is a really good idea, but I guess I was expecting a bit more...perhaps some more solid examples on what to do. I still see the only "upside to down" is if you really hate our society now and want to rebuild it more to your liking. As I said before, that's not exactly the uplifting story I was looking for, but hey, these are crazy times. Overall, I give the book a reserved recommendation.

Read More...

Friday, January 9, 2009

I.O.U.S.A on CNN This Weekend

Editors Update: Video files here: Part I and Part II

In this post, I highlighted former US comptroller David Walker's, "Fiscal Wake Up Tour". This is featured in the documentary I.O.U.S.A. as well. A synopsis:

Wake up, America! We're on the brink of a financial meltdown. I.O.U.S.A. boldly examines the rapidly growing national debt and its consequences for the United States and its citizens. Burdened with an ever-expanding government and military, increased international competition, overextended entitlement programs, and debts to foreign countries that are becoming impossible to honor, America must mend its spendthrift ways or face an economic disaster of epic proportions.

Throughout history, the American government has found it nearly impossible to spend only what has been raised through taxes. Wielding candid interviews with both average American taxpayers and government officials, Sundance veteran Patrick Creadon (Wordplay) helps demystify the nation's financial practices and policies. The film follows former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker as he crisscrosses the country explaining America's unsustainable fiscal policies to its citizens.

With surgical precision, Creadon interweaves archival footage and economic data to paint a vivid and alarming profile of America's current economic situation. The ultimate power of I.O.U.S.A. is that the film moves beyond doomsday rhetoric to proffer potential financial scenarios and propose solutions about how we can recreate a fiscally sound nation for future generations.

Creadon uses candid interviews and his featured subjects include Warren Buffett, Alan Greenspan, Paul O'Neill, Robert Rubin, and Paul Volcker, along with the Peter G. Peterson Foundation's own David Walker and Bob Bixby of the Concord Coalition, a Foundation grantee.

Pointedly topical and consummately nonpartisan, I.O.U.S.A. drives home the message that the only time for America's financial future is now.

I have been meaning to rent this for some time, but have yet to see it. It has been rumored to be airing this weekend on CNN. Supposedly it will be on Saturday, January 10 at 2:00 p.m. EST and on Sunday, January 11 at 3:00 p.m. EST. I say supposedly because my DVR listing was less than descriptive. If I am able to catch it, I'll follow up with a review. Otherwise, I'll still have to rent it sometime. Anyone see it yet?

Read More...

Thursday, January 8, 2009

Word of the Day


contango
[kuhn-tang-goh]

1.
In futures or options trading, a market in which longer-term contracts carry a higher price than near-term contracts.
2. The premium accorded to longer maturities is a normal condition of the market and reflects the cost of carrying the commodity for future delivery.
3. (on the London stock exchange) a fee paid by a buyer of securities to the seller for the privilege of deferring payment.

See also Backwardation.

Read More...

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

Eat Safe


Eat Safe. Bill Statham. Recommended.

I found this book while perusing the new arrivals at the library, and it seems to be quite a good reference. As suggested by In Defense of Food, we should probably only eat foods that have a minimal amount of processing, and we should be able to pronounce and understand all the ingredients. If you've spent much time looking at labels, this can be a daunting task. Certain additives may sound horrible, yet be perfectly safe...and vice versa.

The book lists hundreds of ingredients and gives each a ranking - beneficial ones get two smiley faces, down the scale to two sad faces for dangerous substances. The entire list is also color coded (red, yellow and green) for quick reference. In addition to the rankings, there is a column for function, potential effects, food uses, and other uses.

I would recommend this guidebook for a quick reference, but with some caveats. Food science and medical advice changes over time, so the recommendations may not hold up as research advances. Also, certain substances affect people in different ways, so some "safe" ingredients may be dangerous for a small minority of the population. Overall, however, the book seems well researched and very comprehensive.

Read More...

Monday, January 5, 2009

Professor Predicts Fall of U.S. in 2010


Bordering on the ridiculous, this WSJ article highlights a Russian professor who claims the U.S. will collapse in 2010.

Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces -- with Alaska reverting to Russian control.
He even has a nifty map:



Even if you suspend disbelief a bit and suppose something like this were to actually happen, I really doubt that we all would break along such clean state boundaries. The last chapter of The Long Emergency envisions a similar scenario, but I feel it is more realistic in taking into account our cultural and societal ties and divisions.

I also highly doubt we would be pulled into spheres of influence of other nations, who would no doubt be reeling just as much as us if such a break down occurred.

That being said: "I, for one, welcome our new Canadian overlords."

Read More...

Sunday, January 4, 2009

Key Concept - Tragedy of the Commons


I am beginning a semi-recurring series of interesting (to me) topics to further explore and consolidate certain "Key Concepts". Up first is the namesake of this blog: "The Tragedy of the Commons".

The term and concept was first officially coined by Garrett Hardin in a 1968 Science magazine article, which I highly recommend. (article here) It describes the inclination for multiple rational individuals to act in their own self-interest in the short-term, even at the detriment of all over the long-term.


The tragedy of the commons develops in this way. Picture a pasture open to all. It is to be expected that each herdsman will try to keep as many cattle as possible on the commons. Such an arrangement may work reasonably satisfactorily for centuries because tribal wars, poaching, and disease keep the numbers of both man and beast well below the carrying capacity of the land. Finally, however, comes the day of reckoning, that is, the day when the long-desired goal of social stability becomes a reality. At this point, the inherent logic of the commons remorselessly generates tragedy.

As a rational being, each herdsman seeks to maximize his gain. Explicitly or implicitly, more or less consciously, he asks, "What is the utility to me of adding one more animal to my herd?" This utility has one negative and one positive component.

1) The positive component is a function of the increment of one animal. Since the herdsman receives all the proceeds from the sale of the additional animal, the positive utility is nearly +1.

2) The negative component is a function of the additional overgrazing created by one more animal. Since, however, the effects of overgrazing are shared by all the herdsmen, the negative utility for any particular decision-making herdsman is only a fraction of -1.

Adding together the component partial utilities, the rational herdsman concludes that the only sensible course for him to pursue is to add another animal to his herd. And another; and another.... But this is the conclusion reached by each and every rational herdsman sharing a commons. Therein is the tragedy. Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit--in a world that is limited.
The article raises some very interesting and sometimes rather controversial ideas, the most outstanding being the call to relinquish the freedom to procreate. I'd prefer to highlight some of the other, perhaps less extreme, points:

- There are problems that do not have technical solutions
- It is not mathematically possible to maximize for two (or more) variables at the same time
- Optimal human population is below the maximum population
- The morality of an act is a function of the state of the system at the time it is performed
- An alternative to the commons need not be perfect just to be preferable

While the article is mainly concerned with population growth, the author does mention pollution as an example. In current events, Global Warming certainly fits squarely in the category of a 'Tragedy of the Commons'. The author places global population in the "no technical solution" category; unfortunately, I am more and more inclined to do the same for climate change. Certain parallels are quite striking: as the author cautions against the appeal to conscience, most anti-global warming appeals are decidedly guilt-based. The article posits that these calls are not productive in the long- or short-term.

The long-term disadvantage of an appeal to conscience should be enough to condemn it; but has serious short-term disadvantages as well. If we ask a man who is exploiting a commons to desist "in the name of conscience," what are we saying to him? What does he hear?--not only at the moment but also in the wee small hours of the night when, half asleep, he remembers not merely the words we used but also the nonverbal communication cues we gave him unawares? Sooner or later, consciously or subconsciously, he senses that he has received two communications, and that they are contradictory: (i) (intended communication) "If you don't do as we ask, we will openly condemn you for not acting like a responsible citizen"; (ii) (the unintended communication) "If you do behave as we ask, we will secretly condemn you for a simpleton who can be shamed into standing aside while the rest of us exploit the commons."
My fear is that a solution that is effective, equitable, and enforceable is simply beyond the global community's technical and political ability. This is the true tragedy - "the solemnity of the remorseless working of things".

Read More...

Saturday, January 3, 2009

A Separate Peace


I suspect that history, including great historical novelists of the future, will look back and see that many of our elites simply decided to enjoy their lives while they waited for the next chapter of trouble. And that they consciously, or unconsciously, took grim comfort in this thought: I got mine. Which is what the separate peace comes down to, "I got mine, you get yours."

Article here.

Read More...

Thursday, December 25, 2008

Merry Christmas



I have always thought of Christmas time, when it has come round, as a good time; a kind, forgiving, charitable time; the only time I know of, in the long calendar of the year, when men and women seem by one consent to open their shut-up hearts freely, and to think of people below them as if they really were fellow passengers to the grave, and not another race of creatures bound on other journeys.

Charles Dickens

Read More...

Sunday, December 21, 2008

The Gods of the Copybook Headings


AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.

We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.

We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.

With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."

On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!

-R. Kipling

Read More...

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Bush Has Made Us Vulnerable


Here's a "pull no punches" look at where America stands at the end of the George W. Bush presidency. History may look back on him more favorably than now - since his low approval ratings are probably only surpassed by Gov. Blagojevich. I try to refrain from the Monday Morning Quarterbacking that is very prevalent - he faced huge decisions, and it is easy to criticize when the results of those decisions were not favorable. That being said, we are in trouble as a nation - and as its leader, he bears a large portion of responsibility.

The administrations of George W. Bush have virtually assured such a displacement by catastrophically throwing the country off balance, both politically and financially, while breaking the nation's sword in an inconclusive seven-year struggle against a ragtag enemy in two small bankrupt states.
...
The pity is that the war could have been successful and this equilibrium sustained had we struck immediately, preserving the link with September 11th; had we disciplined our objective to forcing upon regimes that nurture terrorism the choice of routing it out with their ruthless secret services or suffering the destruction of the means to power for which they live; had we husbanded our forces in the highly developed military areas of northern Saudi Arabia after deposing Saddam Hussein, where as a fleet in being they would suffer no casualties and remain at the ready to reach Baghdad, Damascus, or Riyadh in three days; and had we taken strong and effective measures for our domestic protection while striving to stay within constitutional limits and eloquently explaining the necessity -- as has always been the case in war -- for sometimes exceeding them. Today's progressives apologize to the world for America's treatment of terrorists (not a single one of whom has been executed). Franklin Roosevelt, when faced with German saboteurs (who had caused not a single casualty), had them electrocuted and buried in numbered graves next to a sewage plant.

The counterpart to Republican incompetence has been a Democratic opposition warped by sentiment. The deaths of thousands of Americans in attacks upon our embassies, warships, military barracks, civil aviation, capital, and largest city were not a criminal matter but an act of war made possible by governments and legions of enablers in the Arab world. Nothing short of war -- although not the war we have waged -- could have been sufficient in response. The opposition is embarrassed by patriotism and American self-interest, but above all it is blind to the gravity of the matter. Though scattered terrorists allied with militarily insignificant states are not, as some conservatives assert, closely analogous to Nazi Germany, the accessibility of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons makes the destructive capacity of these antagonists unfortunately similar -- a fact, especially in regard to Iran, that is persistently whistled away by the Left.
...
Both failed. The country is exhausted, divided, and improperly protected, and will remain so if the new president and administration are merely another face of the same sterile duality. To avoid the costs of a stalled financial system, the two parties -- after an entire day of reflection -- committed to the expenditure of what with its trailing ends will probably be $1.5 trillion in this fiscal year alone.

Read More...